Zorach v. Clauson

1952 United States Supreme Court case
Zorach v. Clauson
Argued January 31 – February 1, 1952
Decided April 28, 1952
Full case nameZorach, et al. v. Clauson, et al., constituting the Board of Education of the City of New York, et al.
Citations343 U.S. 306 (more)
72 S. Ct. 679; 96 L. Ed. 954; 1952 U.S. LEXIS 2773
Case history
Prior303 N.Y. 161, 100 N.E.2d 463 (1951); probable jurisdiction noted, 72 S. Ct. 232 (1951).
Holding
Released time programs are acceptable if the instruction takes place away from the school campus, for 1 hour per week, and with no public funding.
Court membership
Chief Justice
Fred M. Vinson
Associate Justices
Hugo Black · Stanley F. Reed
Felix Frankfurter · William O. Douglas
Robert H. Jackson · Harold H. Burton
Tom C. Clark · Sherman Minton
Case opinions
MajorityDouglas, joined by Vinson, Reed, Burton, Clark, Minton
DissentBlack
DissentFrankfurter
DissentJackson
Laws applied
U.S. Const. amend. I
Wikisource has original text related to this article:
Zorach v. Clauson

Zorach v. Clauson, 343 U.S. 306 (1952), was a release time case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that a school district to allow students to leave the public school for part of the day to receive off-site religious instruction did not violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.[1]

Case

New York State law permitted schools to allow some students to leave school during school hours for purposes of religious instruction or practice while requiring others to stay in school. Accordingly, students in New York City were allowed to leave only on written request of their guardians, but the schools did not fund or otherwise assist in the development of these programs.

The Greater New York Coordinating Committee on Released Time of Jews, Protestants and Roman Catholics shared their attendance with New York City Department of Education to prevent students from being truant, however.[1] Several parents sued the district for providing official sanction for religious instruction.

Supreme Court

Decision

The US Supreme Court upheld the arrangement by finding that it did not violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment or the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment because the instruction was not held within the school building and received no public funds.

Justice William O. Douglas, writing for the majority, reasoned that "this 'released time' program involves neither religious instruction in public school classrooms nor the expenditure of public funds.... The case is therefore unlike McCollum v. Board of Education."[1]

On the developing controversy of separation doctrine the Zorach majority said that the first amendment did not require an absolute separation of Church and State where "the state and religion would be aliens to each other—hostile, suspicious and even unfriendly".[2]

Dissents

Three justices dissented from the decision. Hugo Black, Felix Frankfurter and Robert H. Jackson considered the law unconstitutional, and all three cited McCollum v. Board of Education (1948)[3] and believed that the Court did not adequately distinguish between the circumstances in McCollum and the ones in Zorach. Jackson's dissent was especially strong: "Today's judgment will be more interesting to students of psychology and of the judicial processes than to students of constitutional law."[1]

See also

References

  1. ^ a b c d Zorach v. Clauson, 343 U.S. 306 (1952).
  2. ^ Ball 1962, p. 186
  3. ^ McCollum v. Board of Education, 333 U.S. 203 (1948).

Further reading

  • Sorauf, Frank J. (1959). "Zorach v. Clauson: The Impact of a Supreme Court Decision". American Political Science Review. 53 (3): 777–791. doi:10.2307/1951943. JSTOR 1951943. S2CID 145174979.
  • Ball, William B. (1962). "The School Prayer Case: Dilemma of Disestablishment - Part I". Catholic Lawyer. 8 (3): 186.

External links

  • Text of Zorach v. Clauson, 343 U.S. 306 (1952) is available from: Cornell  CourtListener  Findlaw  Google Scholar  Justia  Library of Congress  Oyez (oral argument audio) 
  • v
  • t
  • e
SchoolsSpecialized
high schools
The Bronx
Brooklyn
Manhattan
Queens
Staten Island
Chancellors
Unions
Labor unions
Parents union
Legal casesEvents
Sponsored
Not sponsored
Systems used
Technology based
Non-technology based
In pop culture
  • v
  • t
  • e
Rights of students under the United States Constitution case law
First Amendment school prayer
First Amendment school speech
Fourth Amendment exceptions
to the warrant requirement
  • v
  • t
  • e
Public displays
and ceremonies
Statutory religious
exemptions
Public funding
Religion in
public schools
Private religious speech
Internal church affairs
Taxpayer standing
Blue laws
Other
Exclusion of religion
from public benefits
Ministerial exception
Statutory religious exemptions
RFRA
RLUIPA
Unprotected
speech
Incitement
and sedition
Libel and
false speech
Fighting words and
the heckler's veto
True threats
Obscenity
Speech integral
to criminal conduct
Strict scrutiny
Vagueness
Symbolic speech
versus conduct
Content-based
restrictions
Content-neutral
restrictions
In the
public forum
Designated
public forum
Nonpublic
forum
Compelled speech
Compelled subsidy
of others' speech
Compelled representation
Government grants
and subsidies
Government
as speaker
Loyalty oaths
School speech
Public employees
Hatch Act and
similar laws
Licensing and
restriction of speech
Commercial speech
Campaign finance
and political speech
Anonymous speech
State action
Official retaliation
Boycotts
Prisons
Prior restraints
and censorship
Privacy
Taxation and
privileges
Defamation
Broadcast media
Copyrighted materials
Incorporation
Protection from prosecution
and state restrictions
Organizations
Future Conduct
Solicitation
Membership restriction
Primaries and elections